To demand a harder hitting campaign to promote breastfeeding?

[WashwithCare]

I?m sometimes taken aback to hear mothers gave up bf-ing because it was sore, or involved feeding for hours at a time? What did they expect? What did they think newborns do? Didn?t they imagine that anything chewing on your nipple for 10 hours a day was going to nip a bit?

But then again, who can blame them? Breastfeeding for the minimum WHO recommendation of 2 years is practically unheard of. Nearly everyone will tell you it?s absolutely your decision, and fine to stop. The public info campaign is fluffy and vague about the benefits, and the baby on the follow-on formula milk box looks decidedly peachy. Lots of women are so mis-informed, they believe that formula is almost as good as breastmilk.

Is it time for something a little harder hitting? How about this for a tv ad; (scene 1) mum feeding her newborn a bottle telling her mate how hard bf-ing was. Caption: Breastfeeding Hurts. (scene 2) same mum, but now older, bald and sick, hugs toddler. Caption: So does breast cancer. FADE to caption: "Breastfeeding significantly Reduces your Life Time Risk of Breast Cancer". Followed by cheesy inspirational slogan.

Cancer research is also not citing it as a fact, their very 1st sentence to their link, is that it "MAY" reduce cancer rates if you breast feed.

That words means a awful awful lot and changes the whole context of the article. For me and alot of my cirlce, who actually BF their children x

It's confusing LittleMrs

They use the word 'can' initially but then they say that BF is 'definitely' protective against cancer:

'Breastfeeding can protect you against developing breast cancer. We don't know exactly how breastfeeding is protective but we know that it definitely is.'

Ho hum. I'm like a dog with a bone over this, I realise.

And it's not because I'm pro-BF (although I am, very much so). It's because I'm pedantic and extremely competitive and will argue a minor point 'til the cows come home. Just the way I am

Anyway, as I've said all along, I think there's a lot of evidence that BF is better than FF for babies. I feel very sad for women who want to BF but have difficulty with it, hence I became a peer supporter to try to help improve rates of BFing for this particular group of women.

For women who simply choose not to BF...well, they might have strong psychological reasons, which is fair enough.

They might not really have any reason other than they are not used to seeing BFing and they think it's a bit 'ick'. I think it's these women who may be influenced to change their minds by some of the promotion. (But not the kind of promotion suggested in the OP!)

Olifin, I think that bf is sort of hidden in the UK, it's not something we really come into contact with on a daily basis, unless we're feeding ourselves or have friends/family bf around us.

I was convinced that I was going to be really quite militant about it when I had my DS yet, when it came down to it, I just wanted to do it privately, away from curious eyes.

I think part of that was to do with the usual difficulties that some new mums face when starting on bf for the first time, basically a huge crisis of confidence.

I really would like to see bf brought out into the public arena. Why can't all public buildings, doctors surgeries, hospitals, schools, libraries, sports centres, even tax offices and the job centre, be forced to put on very public view a breastfeeding area, where women can sit, quiety and privately if they want to, to breastfeed?

Why can't we campaign for all large stores, restaurants and cafes to offer prominent facilties for bf, rather than the pitiful few who do so now? If they don't have the space, why not put up posters shouting loud and clear that they welcome breastfeeding mothers?

It's just a few ideas and I know it won't change the world overnight, but it might help to change the view that bf is some kind of dirty little secret that can only be done in the privacy of your own home.

Just thinking out loud really.

Olifin, and wubbly couldn't both agree with you more, everything in this country is blooming taboo from a natural side of thing, SEX,BREASTFEEDING, HOW TO raise children.

Going back to when I said imagery as to see is believe in my opinion, in the real sense of BF, not just a mother adoringly looking into their child's eyes while BF (not saying this is true) but in the same stance is not as easy as all the advertisement make it it to be.

How about real imagery photos, mastitis, breast feeding hurts for some, engorgement, all done in a tasteful way but showing REAL BF and the problems that are their but can be easily overcome with the correct support groups/networks.

It was only 6 months ago when I started BF ds2 that the MW came in whipped my tops down and started flicking my nipple (I have a inverted one) to start to feed my son lol, I was just and it was very intimidating also. I soon tod her off tho lol x but I had lovely support, they were even supportive when I HAD to stop, but couldn't give me nay advice about FM as they weren't allowed due to the BREAST is BEST campaign, I think both feeding method needs to be addressed (in situations like mine) in support and advice.

Can I just say also, Im waiting on WWC to answer my questions, on how does she propose I feed my son, when BF wasn't a option for him as is milk banks (due to his allergies) It would have meant I would have to cut ALL dairy, lactose food groups and also citrus food groups out of my diet. I am generally wanting to know this question?

Olifin and LittleMissHappy- thanks. I'm hoping all will be well but DH's discreet flapping (such as having a feel when he thinks I'm asleep just to see if it is definately still there) is making mw flap.

By Allidon Sat 16-Jan-10 22:56:27
I do know most FF babies are fine. Most children in this country will more than likely have had some amount of formula as babies, yet most children are healthy and you couldn't pick an EBF child out of a line up. Statistically, most babies who are FF do just fine.

Yes, but picking out an EBF child in a line up isn't the appropriate test, is it? I couldn't pick out children who had a genetic tendency towards heart disease either - that doesn't mean they're not more likely to die of a heart attack.

I'm not sure I agree htat most babies who are FF are just fine. OK, the increased risk of leukemia is probably statistically small... and you are unlikely to die of a tummy upset in scotland, even if you are hospitatlised and it is a nasty one...

BUT what about a propensity towards obesity in non-breastfed children? Being obese is a serious health problem which results in many deaths...

It just comes down to this for me... it's not everything, but it is the healthier start you can give your child. If you can, why wouldn't you want to?

I'm sorry, Only read the OP but

Try telling the idea of your advert to my cousin. The one who was breastfed until she was 3 years old, the one who lost her 36yr old mum to breast cancer when she was just 11.

Little Mrs Happy wrote:
Extended breastfeeding and how do you think I can do that, their is no milk banks here in the North East! and nor would another humans BM be suitable for my child! SO TELL ME PLEASE?!

my son is not only COWS milk protein ALLERGY! but he is also lactose Intolerance and also citrus allergy, so please tell me how I can safely breast feed my child, and take care of my older child and for it not to impact on my own health by cutting out the basic and also needed foods in a healthy diet!

I will answer the quesiton with pleasure. Your child is not allergic to your Breastmilk. If your son has allergies to cow milk, citrus and lactose, what you needed to do is avoid these foods whilst you were breastfeeding.

To suggest that cutting these food out (whilst inconvenient I'm sure) would have an adverse impact on your own health is very silly. It is nuisance, but many people manage on a lactose free diet.

You just chose not to breastfeed.

TBH, I think it's really up to you - OPs seems to think I am telling you, you should have breastfed - possibly I am saying that, but only in the sense that I htink every mother should bf.

What I really object to about your posts is that rather than just admitting you couldn't be bothered to limit your own diet to enable your son to benefit from breast milk, you want to pretend that some how your son had a medical conditon that made your milk not the best thing for him. What tosh - breast, as ever is best - you just chose not to give it.

By Allidon Sun 17-Jan-10 07:50:40
standanddeliver, tbf to LMH, WWC did imply that LMH only gave up breastfeeding because she didn't understand her son's allergies, and if she'd only looked into it further she could have given up eating all the foods her son is allergic to and continued bf. That isn't really a fair judgement and WWC has no right to tell LMH that she didn't do enough to continue breastfeeding.

I don't think it's a judgement, it's a matter of fact.

Allidon Sun 17-Jan-10 09:43:23
And yet some babies are born at 35 weeks (and even earlier) with no intervention from the mother or medical professionals. Doesn't seem a great leap that some babies might self wean earlier than is the norm.

True - but 2 years is ust the WHO minimum recommendaiton. The average weaning age in cultures where breastfeeding is accepted as normal, is more like between 4 and 6 years... so err... 17 months is well outside the norm.

WWC, I had written a detailed reply to your posts but after your last two posts to LMH I refuse to post to you again. You nasty, judgemental, evil woman.

By Olifin Sun 17-Jan-10 09:45:55
Good point Allidon.

WWC, what about the fact that bfing to 2 years old is not possible/desirable for the vast majority of mothers in the UK?

In what way? Just to point out, before you ask, I went back to work when DD was a year. There are some sacrifices around extended feeding - but so what?

I never thought I believed in karma but WWC all of the problems you are having as detailed in your other charming thread with regard to your step children are quite frankly no more than you deserve . You really are poisonous and quite frankly deserve every bit of misery dished at you if this is how you speak to people .

FWIW my own issue with this thread and some of the posts is the assertion that only thick, uneducated, selfish or lazy mothers don't bf their children for 2 years, or that they simply didn't try hard enough. I'm assuming you've seen the posts I'm talking about?

Here's the scottish breastfeeding stats:
www.isdscotland.org/isd/5939.html

?There is a clear association between breastfeeding and deprivation. In 2008, 42.4% of mothers in the least deprived areas were exclusively breastfeeding at the 6-8 review, compared with 14.4% of mothers in the most deprived areas. This means mothers in the least deprived areas were nearly three times as likely to exclusively breastfeed at 6-8 weeks compared with mothers in the most deprived areas.

There's no point in being offended about people saying that poor women whith no education are less likely to breastfeed. Just be outraged that this is true.

TotallyAndUtterlyPaninied I wish you all the very best for your appointment and hope that your lump is nothing to worry about, as is very often the case.

Me too - really hope it is nothing to worry about. Wash. x

By Olifin Sun 17-Jan-10 16:36:08
It's confusing LittleMrs

They use the word 'can' initially but then they say that BF is 'definitely' protective against cancer:

'Breastfeeding can protect you against developing breast cancer. We don't know exactly how breastfeeding is protective but we know that it definitely is.'

Good grief - it's not exactly rocket science.. it may protect you against cancer, because there is only a chance you will get it anyway whether you breastfeed or not - it's not like every woman gets breast cancer...

By Allidon Sun 17-Jan-10 18:55:07
WWC, I had written a detailed reply to your posts but after your last two posts to LMH I refuse to post to you again. You nasty, judgemental, evil woman.

That's rather rude and hysterical... tbh I'm baffled as to what you're quite so upset about - because I pointed out that she chose to eat oranges rather than breastfeed? She is the one who volunteered the information - I'm just stating the obvious.

By hobnobsaremyfave Sun 17-Jan-10 18:59:32
I never thought I believed in karma but WWC all of the problems you are having as detailed in your other charming thread with regard to your step children are quite frankly no more than you deserve . You really are poisonous and quite frankly deserve every bit of misery dished at you if this is how you speak to people .

If you (now) believe in karma, wishing a horrible situation on a 3 year old and 2 teenagers and an unborn baby to boot is not exactly going to do much for yours, is it?

Why do debates about breastfeeding always sink into insults from FF supporters? I have yet to read a bf-ing thread, where bf-ing supporters wish horrible things on those who do not believe in supporrting bf-ing as vigorously as they do. Sad.

'WWC, what about the fact that bfing to 2 years old is not possible/desirable for the vast majority of mothers in the UK?

In what way? Just to point out, before you ask, I went back to work when DD was a year. There are some sacrifices around extended feeding - but so what?'

Well, I explained in an earlier post but what I'm referring to is:

-Going back to work: many women don't want the inconvenience of expressing so that they can continue to BF on returning to work.It creates extra work for women who are already very busy!

-Many women feel they want their body 'back' after a long period of breast feeding.

-I can't be the only woman whose sex life was affected by breast feeding?! I didn't want that to continue indefinitely. So shoot me!

So, what I'm saying, I guess, is that feeding to 2 years isn't desirable for many (most?) women in the UK where our lifestyle is quite different to that of women in other cultures.

Personally, I had developed a nasty case of PND and I'm afraid to say that extended breast feeding (although I loved it, in many ways and it was obviously beneficial to my son) was a factor in this.

WWC, I think telling LittleMrs she 'couldn't be bothered' is going far too far.

LittleMrs My friend eliminated lactose from her diet in order to BF her little girl. She was able (and chose to) BF her to beyond a year old. That was her choice and you were perfectly entitled to make the choice YOU made. Please don't feel you have to defend yourself.

How do you know how I fed my children WWC ? Don't make assumptions you just make yourself look stupid. And by the way the words pot kettle and black spring to min you dish it out with venom but really don't like it when people tell you what they think of you and your ridiculous attitudes.

I think that WWC has empathy problems and is just unable to see that the way she says things is really quite unpleasant at times, and that causes hurt not understanding. Perhaps that's because she is (according to her other thread) under a lot of stress at the moment. Or perhaps that's just how she is.

For those struggling or wanting advice please go over to the breastfeeding threads where there are real experts who have a wealth of experience and are also very nice and supportive of real people with real issues.

For those struggling with the way that research is presented, you have to consider that most studies are done looking at groups of people. For those actually studied the findings can be presented as fact because this is observed data. So in the group being looked at in that study there was a big difference (and in research terms a 59% difference is huge and really fairly unusual). They then can extrapolate, and say that in the wider population for people like those in the study the same effect is likely to be seen (ie if you look at all women with a strong family history of breast cancer it is likely that those who breastfed were less likely to get breast cancer). For an individual (even in this group) this is about risk, a protective action that you can take if your mother or aunt had early breast cancer is to breastfeed. But there are no certainties because some women in the study who breastfed went on to develop cancer, and some women (probably a fairly large number in fact) who didn't breastfeed didn't get cancer.

This is not about the difference between fact and theory, although the researchers may go on to theorise as to why breastfeeding appears to make a difference where there is a strong family history, but not in the general population. The theory is important for understanding and for future research, but it doesn't affect the finding with such a large effect (it's much more important when there is a small effect which could be caused by something quite else).

The reasons why researchers are very careful with their language is that each piece of research tends to tell only part of the picture. Maybe there was somethign else going on that they didn't measure, or the control and study groups had some difference they weren't aware of, or the whole group is different from the general population. That is why meta-analysis was developed (looking at lots of studies and seeing where there is consistency).

For an individual it is about judging what is relevant to you. For example as none of my relatives have had breast cancer, this one makes no difference to me. Likewise I'm not worried about obesity (my family are consistently thin), with SIDS I did back to sleep, but didn't share a room for my own sanity. Each of us makes our own decision based on our knowledge and our circumstances. I stopped breastfeeding dd because I had labrythitis and there is no way I personally could have ridden it out without medication, but if I had been living with extended family for example perhaps I could have done so. We all make risk based decisions all the time because very little in life is certain.

nooka I found that to be a really interesting and informative post, thank you. You also come across as very wise and diplomatic!

Offin

I think bf-ing to 2 years is an ideal. The real problem in the UK is not that women feel under pressure to feed to 2 years, but they feel under pressure to stop.

If you do any extended bf-ing support, or go look at a feeding toddlers board, you'll find lot of women looking for reassurance that they won't feel "yuk" feeding their older baby, or they are looking for support on how to deal with derision from friends, relatives and their bf-ing peer group, who have usually stopped feeding themselves.

FWIW, I have never expressed, and had no difficulty in continuing to bf - there are other options, e.g. I know mums with year old babies who cosleep at night to keep up the feeding. It is not for everyone, but there are options, and bf-ing a baby who is also taking solids is very different from bf-ing a small baby.

I think the idea of wanting your body 'back' after a long period of breast feeding is something that we should (as a society I mean)talk about more. I have heard this a lot - but am not totaly sure about the feelings behind it...

A lot of the physical discomfort has gone by the time baby is older - leaky boobs are a thing of the past. I can also take most medecines now - a lot that say "not if you're bfing" realy only apply to feeding a young baby.

I personally find the idea that you haven't got your body to yourself, just cos you're bf-ing for 10 minutes a day a bit odd. You wouldn't think you didn't own your arms because you cuddle your child once in a while - would you?

You said - -I can't be the only woman whose sex life was affected by breast feeding?! I didn't want that to continue indefinitely. So shoot me!

Well, I won't shoot you It probably effects different women differently...

You said: WWC, I think telling LittleMrs she 'couldn't be bothered' is going far too far.

I'm not sure why you think I've gone too far. Her initial claims was that bm would have poisioned her son. I thought this was really strange, and wondered if she had some sort of delusional illness, as I couldn't imagine any scenario where this could be the case.

Then she later revealed that in fact all she meant was that her son had allergies, and that she would have had to have made dietary changes in order to feed him.

This is far removed from her initial claim, which I think was irresponsible. Mother's milk does not poision children - if anything, my understanding is that the rise in alergies had been linked to formula feeding... but don't press me on that, because it's not something I have looked into - perhaps standanddelvier can comment, as she seems to have a broader public health hat on than I do...

You said - LittleMrs My friend eliminated lactose from her diet in order to BF her little girl. She was able (and chose to) BF her to beyond a year old. That was her choice and you were perfectly entitled to make the choice YOU made. Please don't feel you have to defend yourself.

Exactly - women can and do do this.

But the pertinent point here is that as you rightly point out, LittleMRs made a choice - it wasn't her consultant's medical advice that her bm was poisionous to her son that led her to ff - it was her choice.. That's all I'm saying. You say she chose not to, I say she couldnt' be bothered - but our meaning is the same.

Thank you for that excellent post nooka

How do you know what LMH's consultant told her? Perhaps she was told it would be impossible for her to continue bf? I don't have a problem with you saying that it is possible to continue bf in spite of allergies, I do think it is judgemental and unfair for you to tell LMH that you know more about her baby's condition than she does, or that she couldn't be bothered to make dietary changes. I think you would do right to apologise to LMH for your comments about her personal situation.

BTW, I wasn't aware that we had to declare sides before we could enter the debate. I haven't mentioned my feeding choices because they aren't relevant to my opinion so please don't seek to presume anything.